Hegel's Lectures on the History of Philosophy: Volume 3 (of 3) — Georg Hegel — John Shaqi
Hegel's Lectures on the History of Philosophy: Volume 3 (of 3)
Georg Hegel · en
This is the philosophy of Locke, in which there is no trace of
speculation. The great end of Philosophy, which is to know the truth,
is in it sought to be attained in an empiric way; it thus indeed serves
to draw attention to general determinations. But such a philosophy not
only represents the standpoint of ordinary consciousness, to which all
the determinations of its thought appear as if given, humble as it is
in the oblivion of its activity, but in this method of derivation and
psychological origination that which alone concerns Philosophy, the
question of whether these thoughts and relationships have truth in and
for themselves, is not present at all, inasmuch as the only object aimed
at is to describe the manner in which thought accepts what is given to
it. It may be held with Wolff that it is arbitrary to begin with concrete
conceptions, as when our conception of identity is made to take its
origin from such things as blue flowers and the blue heavens. One can
better begin directly from universal conceptions and say that we find
in our consciousness the conceptions of time, cause and effect; these
are the later facts of consciousness. This method forms the basis of
the Wolffian system of reasoning, only here we must still distinguish
amongst the different conceptions those that are to be regarded as most
essential; in Locke’s philosophy, this distinction cannot really be said
to come under consideration. From this time, according to Locke, or in
this particular aspect of Philosophy, there is a complete and entire
change in the point of view adopted; the whole interest is limited to the
form in which the objective, or individual sensations, pass into the form
of conceptions. In the case of Spinoza and Malebranche, we undoubtedly
likewise saw that it was made a matter of importance to recognize this
relation of thought to what is sensuously perceived, and thus to know it
as falling into relation, as passing into the relative; the main question
hence was: How are the two related? But the question was answered to the
effect that it is only this relation for itself that constitutes the
point of interest, and this relation itself as absolute substance is thus
identity, the true, God, it is not the related parts. The interest does
not lie in the related parts; the related parts as one-sided are not the
existent, presupposed and permanently established, they are accidental
merely. But here the related sides, the things and the subject, have
their proper value, and they are presupposed as having this value.
Locke’s reasoning is quite shallow; it keeps entirely to the phenomenal,
to that which is, and not to that which is true.